Florida Statute 760.11 - Full Text and Legal Analysis

The 2025 Florida Statutes

Title XLIV
CIVIL RIGHTS

Chapter 760
DISCRIMINATION IN THE TREATMENT OF PERSONS; MINORITY REPRESENTATION

View Entire Chapter

F.S. 760.11

760.11 Administrative and civil remedies; construction.—

(1) Any person aggrieved by a violation of ss. 760.01-760.10 may file a complaint with the commission within 365 days of the alleged violation, naming the employer, employment agency, labor organization, or joint labor-management committee, or, in the case of an alleged violation of s. 760.10(5), the person responsible for the violation and describing the violation. Any person aggrieved by a violation of s. 509.092 may file a complaint with the commission within 365 days of the alleged violation naming the person responsible for the violation and describing the violation. The commission, a commissioner, or the Attorney General may in like manner file such a complaint. On the same day the complaint is filed with the commission, the commission shall clearly stamp on the face of the complaint the date the complaint was filed with the commission. In lieu of filing the complaint with the commission, a complaint under this section may be filed with the federal Equal Employment Opportunity Commission or with any unit of government of the state which is a fair-employment-practice agency under 29 C.F.R. ss. 1601.70-1601.80. If the date the complaint is filed is clearly stamped on the face of the complaint, that date is the date of filing. The date the complaint is filed with the commission for purposes of this section is the earliest date of filing with the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, the fair-employment-practice agency, or the commission. The complaint shall contain a short and plain statement of the facts describing the violation and the relief sought. The commission may require additional information to be in the complaint. The commission, within 5 days of the complaint being filed, shall by registered mail send a copy of the complaint to the person who allegedly committed the violation. The person who allegedly committed the violation may file an answer to the complaint within 25 days of the date the complaint was filed with the commission. Any answer filed shall be mailed to the aggrieved person by the person filing the answer. Both the complaint and the answer shall be verified.

(2) If any other agency of the state or of any other unit of government of the state has jurisdiction of the subject matter of any complaint filed with the commission and has legal authority to investigate the complaint, the commission may refer such complaint to such agency for an investigation. Referral of such a complaint by the commission does not constitute agency action within the meaning of s. 120.52. If the commission refers a complaint to another agency under this subsection, the commission shall accord substantial weight to any findings and conclusions of any such agency. The referral of a complaint by the commission to a local agency does not divest the commission’s jurisdiction over the complaint.

(3) Except as provided in subsection (2), the commission shall investigate the allegations in the complaint. Within 180 days of the filing of the complaint, the commission shall determine if there is reasonable cause to believe that discriminatory practice has occurred in violation of the Florida Civil Rights Act of 1992. When the commission determines whether or not there is reasonable cause, the commission by registered mail shall promptly notify the aggrieved person and the respondent of the reasonable cause determination, the date of such determination, and the options available under this section.

(4) If the commission determines that there is reasonable cause to believe that a discriminatory practice has occurred in violation of the Florida Civil Rights Act of 1992, the aggrieved person may either:

(a) Bring a civil action against the person named in the complaint in any court of competent jurisdiction; or

(b) Request an administrative hearing under ss. 120.569 and 120.57.

The election by the aggrieved person of filing a civil action or requesting an administrative hearing under this subsection is the exclusive procedure available to the aggrieved person under this act.

(5) In any civil action brought under this section, the court may issue an order prohibiting the discriminatory practice and providing affirmative relief from the effects of the practice, including back pay. The court may also award compensatory damages, including, but not limited to, damages for mental anguish, loss of dignity, and any other intangible injuries, and punitive damages. The provisions of ss. 768.72 and 768.73 do not apply to this section. The judgment for the total amount of punitive damages awarded under this section to an aggrieved person shall not exceed $100,000. In any action or proceeding under this subsection, the court, in its discretion, may allow the prevailing party a reasonable attorney’s fee as part of the costs. It is the intent of the Legislature that this provision for attorney’s fees be interpreted in a manner consistent with federal case law involving a Title VII action. The right to trial by jury is preserved in any such private right of action in which the aggrieved person is seeking compensatory or punitive damages, and any party may demand a trial by jury. The commission’s determination of reasonable cause is not admissible into evidence in any civil proceeding, including any hearing or trial, except to establish for the court the right to maintain the private right of action. A civil action brought under this section shall be commenced no later than 1 year after the date of determination of reasonable cause by the commission. The commencement of such action shall divest the commission of jurisdiction of the complaint, except that the commission may intervene in the civil action as a matter of right. Notwithstanding the above, the state and its agencies and subdivisions shall not be liable for punitive damages. The total amount of recovery against the state and its agencies and subdivisions shall not exceed the limitation as set forth in s. 768.28(5).

(6) Any administrative hearing brought pursuant to paragraph (4)(b) shall be conducted under ss. 120.569 and 120.57. The commission may hear the case provided that the final order is issued by members of the commission who did not conduct the hearing or the commission may request that it be heard by an administrative law judge pursuant to s. 120.569(2)(a). If the commission elects to hear the case, it may be heard by a commissioner. If the commissioner, after the hearing, finds that a violation of the Florida Civil Rights Act of 1992 has occurred, the commissioner shall issue an appropriate proposed order in accordance with chapter 120 prohibiting the practice and providing affirmative relief from the effects of the practice, including back pay. If the administrative law judge, after the hearing, finds that a violation of the Florida Civil Rights Act of 1992 has occurred, the administrative law judge shall issue an appropriate recommended order in accordance with chapter 120 prohibiting the practice and providing affirmative relief from the effects of the practice, including back pay. Within 90 days of the date the recommended or proposed order is rendered, the commission shall issue a final order by adopting, rejecting, or modifying the recommended order as provided under ss. 120.569 and 120.57. The 90-day period may be extended with the consent of all the parties. An administrative hearing pursuant to paragraph (4)(b) must be requested no later than 35 days after the date of determination of reasonable cause by the commission. In any action or proceeding under this subsection, the commission, in its discretion, may allow the prevailing party a reasonable attorney’s fee as part of the costs. It is the intent of the Legislature that this provision for attorney’s fees be interpreted in a manner consistent with federal case law involving a Title VII action.

(7) If the commission determines that there is not reasonable cause to believe that a violation of the Florida Civil Rights Act of 1992 has occurred, the commission shall dismiss the complaint. The aggrieved person may request an administrative hearing under ss. 120.569 and 120.57, but any such request must be made within 35 days of the date of determination of reasonable cause and any such hearing shall be heard by an administrative law judge and not by the commission or a commissioner. If the aggrieved person does not request an administrative hearing within the 35 days, the claim will be barred. If the administrative law judge finds that a violation of the Florida Civil Rights Act of 1992 has occurred, he or she shall issue an appropriate recommended order to the commission prohibiting the practice and recommending affirmative relief from the effects of the practice, including back pay. Within 90 days of the date the recommended order is rendered, the commission shall issue a final order by adopting, rejecting, or modifying the recommended order as provided under ss. 120.569 and 120.57. The 90-day period may be extended with the consent of all the parties. In any action or proceeding under this subsection, the commission, in its discretion, may allow the prevailing party a reasonable attorney’s fee as part of the costs. It is the intent of the Legislature that this provision for attorney’s fees be interpreted in a manner consistent with federal case law involving a Title VII action. In the event the final order issued by the commission determines that a violation of the Florida Civil Rights Act of 1992 has occurred, the aggrieved person may bring, within 1 year of the date of the final order, a civil action under subsection (5) as if there has been a reasonable cause determination or accept the affirmative relief offered by the commission, but not both.

(8) If the commission fails to conciliate or determine whether there is reasonable cause on any complaint under this section within 180 days after the filing of the complaint:

(a) An aggrieved person may proceed under subsection (4) as if the commission determined that there was reasonable cause.

(b) The commission shall promptly notify the aggrieved person of the failure to conciliate or determine whether there is reasonable cause. The notice shall provide the options available to the aggrieved person under subsection (4) and inform the aggrieved person that he or she must file a civil action within 1 year after the date the commission certifies that the notice was mailed.

(c) A civil action brought by an aggrieved person under this section must be commenced within 1 year after the date the commission certifies that the notice was mailed pursuant to paragraph (b).

(9) No liability for back pay shall accrue from a date more than 2 years prior to the filing of a complaint with the commission.

(10) A judgment for the amount of damages and costs assessed pursuant to a final order by the commission may be entered in any court having jurisdiction thereof and may be enforced as any other judgment.

(11) If a complaint is within the jurisdiction of the commission, the commission shall simultaneously with its other statutory obligations attempt to eliminate or correct the alleged discrimination by informal methods of conference, conciliation, and persuasion. Nothing said or done in the course of such informal endeavors may be made public or used as evidence in a subsequent civil proceeding, trial, or hearing. The commission may initiate dispute resolution procedures, including voluntary arbitration, by special magistrates or mediators. The commission may adopt rules as to the qualifications of persons who may serve as special magistrates and mediators.

(12) All complaints filed with the commission and all records and documents in the custody of the commission, which relate to and identify a particular person, including, but not limited to, a complainant, employer, employment agency, labor organization, or joint labor-management committee shall be confidential and shall not be disclosed by the commission, except to the parties or in the course of a hearing or proceeding under this section. The restriction of this subsection shall not apply to any record or document which is part of the record of any hearing or court proceeding.

(13) Final orders of the commission are subject to judicial review pursuant to s. 120.68. The commission’s determination of reasonable cause is not final agency action that is subject to judicial review. Unless specifically ordered by the court, the commencement of an appeal does not suspend or stay the order of the commission, except as provided in the Rules of Appellate Procedure. In any action or proceeding under this subsection, the court, in its discretion, may allow the prevailing party a reasonable attorney’s fee as part of the cost. It is the intent of the Legislature that this provision for attorney’s fees be interpreted in a manner consistent with federal case law involving a Title VII action. In the event the order of the court determines that a violation of the Florida Civil Rights Act of 1992 has occurred, the court shall remand the matter to the commission for appropriate relief. The aggrieved party has the option to accept the relief offered by the commission or may bring, within 1 year of the date of the court order, a civil action under subsection (5) as if there has been a reasonable cause determination.

(14) The commission may adopt, promulgate, amend, and rescind rules to effectuate the purposes and policies of this section and to govern the proceedings of the commission under this section.

(15) In any civil action or administrative proceeding brought pursuant to this section, a finding that a person employed by the state or any governmental entity or agency has violated s. 760.10 shall as a matter of law constitute just or substantial cause for such person’s discharge.

History.—s. 8, ch. 92-177; s. 3, ch. 92-282; s. 1, ch. 94-91; s. 417, ch. 96-406; s. 302, ch. 96-410; s. 1, ch. 2001-187; s. 97, ch. 2004-11; s. 7, ch. 2015-68; s. 3, ch. 2020-153.

F.S. 760.11 on Google Scholar

F.S. 760.11 on CourtListener

Amendments to 760.11

Annotations, Discussions, Cases:

Cases Citing Statute 760.11

Total Results: 163

Joshua v. City of Gainesville

768 So. 2d 432, 25 Fla. L. Weekly Supp. 641, 2000 Fla. LEXIS 1751, 2000 WL 1227755

Supreme Court of Florida | Filed: Aug 31, 2000 | Docket: 629162

Cited 107 times | Published

to be of great public importance: DOES THE SECTION 760.11(5), FLORIDA STATUTES (1995), ONE-YEAR STATUTE

Sheely v. MRI Radiology Network, P.A.

505 F.3d 1173, 2007 WL 3087215

Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit | Filed: Nov 7, 2007 | Docket: 17166

Cited 94 times | Published

action for all relief and damages described in § 760.11(5), unless greater damages are expressly provided

Woodham v. Blue Cross and Blue Shield of Fla., Inc.

829 So. 2d 891, 27 Fla. L. Weekly Supp. 834, 2002 Fla. LEXIS 1967, 2002 WL 31259952

Supreme Court of Florida | Filed: Oct 10, 2002 | Docket: 2451040

Cited 87 times | Published

PURSUE THE ADMINISTRATIVE REMEDIES PROVIDED IN SECTION 760.11(7), FLORIDA STATUTES, WHEN THE CLAIMANT HAS

Myers v. CENTRAL FLORIDA INVESTMENTS, INC.

592 F.3d 1201, 2010 U.S. App. LEXIS 232, 108 Fair Empl. Prac. Cas. (BNA) 111, 2010 WL 20987

Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit | Filed: Jan 6, 2010 | Docket: 1152239

Cited 51 times | Published

September 15, 2000, under the FCRA, see Fla. Stat. § 760.11(a), and on or after November 19, 2000, under Title

Donato v. American Tel. & Tel. Co.

767 So. 2d 1146, 81 Fair Empl. Prac. Cas. (BNA) 1302

Supreme Court of Florida | Filed: Jan 20, 2000 | Docket: 1193997

Cited 42 times | Published

file a complaint with the Commission. See id. § 760.11(1). If the Commission finds reasonable grounds

Mangin v. Westco Security Systems, Inc.

922 F. Supp. 563, 6 Am. Disabilities Cas. (BNA) 1701, 1996 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 4561, 1996 WL 173026

District Court, M.D. Florida | Filed: Feb 2, 1996 | Docket: 1651313

Cited 35 times | Published

discrimination and handicap discrimination. See Fla.Stat. § 760.11. The underlying policies and objectives of these

Maggio v. Fla. Dept. of Labor & Emp. SEC.

899 So. 2d 1074, 2005 WL 673677

Supreme Court of Florida | Filed: Mar 24, 2005 | Docket: 757462

Cited 33 times | Published

set of presuit administrative procedures. See § 760.11(1), Fla. Stat. (2003).[3] Further, although a

Ayers v. Wal-Mart Stores, Inc.

941 F. Supp. 1163, 1996 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 19019, 1996 WL 529300

District Court, M.D. Florida | Filed: Jul 29, 1996 | Docket: 2254563

Cited 21 times | Published

for a plaintiff to pursue a claim in court. Section 760.11(4) provides that, where the commission determines

Kraft Gen. Foods, Inc. v. Rosenblum

635 So. 2d 106, 1994 WL 112249

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Apr 6, 1994 | Docket: 1353070

Cited 19 times | Published

the other hand, Kraft calls our attention to section 760.11(5), Florida Statutes (1993), in which while

Brewer v. Clerk of Circuit Court

720 So. 2d 602, 1998 Fla. App. LEXIS 13906, 1998 WL 764170

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Nov 4, 1998 | Docket: 1718893

Cited 18 times | Published

Plaintiff is timely in bringing this action. See § 760.11, Fla. Stat. (1995) (providing that, prior to bringing

Speedway SuperAmerica, LLC v. Dupont

933 So. 2d 75, 2006 Fla. App. LEXIS 8251, 98 Fair Empl. Prac. Cas. (BNA) 459, 2006 WL 1458929

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: May 26, 2006 | Docket: 1711943

Cited 17 times | Published

[3] This policy is expressly incorporated in section 760.11(5), which provides that in civil actions brought

Hudson v. International Computer Negotiations, Inc.

499 F.3d 1252, 2007 WL 2693505

Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit | Filed: Sep 17, 2007 | Docket: 2028737

Cited 15 times | Published

and his attorneys under § 1132(g)(1) of ERISA, § 760.11(5) of the FCRA, and 28 U.S.C. § 1927. By separate

Winn-Dixie Stores, Inc. v. Reddick

954 So. 2d 723, 2007 Fla. App. LEXIS 6299, 2007 WL 1213418

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Apr 26, 2007 | Docket: 1163972

Cited 15 times | Published

As this issue deals with the construction of section 760.11(5), Florida Statutes, it is reviewed by this

Klonis v. State, Dept. of Revenue

766 So. 2d 1186, 2000 WL 1298940

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Sep 15, 2000 | Docket: 1329890

Cited 15 times | Published

complaint in any court of competent jurisdiction." § 760.11(4)(a), Fla. Stat. (1997). Fifth, the Florida Legislature

Blount v. Sterling Healthcare Group, Inc.

934 F. Supp. 1365, 1996 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 11239, 1996 WL 444930

District Court, S.D. Florida | Filed: May 28, 1996 | Docket: 1780139

Cited 15 times | Published

court of competent jurisdiction; .... Fla. Stat. § 760.11. The plain reading of this statute shows that

Sandra Sheridan v. State of Florida, Department of Health

182 So. 3d 787

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Jan 5, 2016 | Docket: 3025960

Cited 14 times | Published

administrative remedies provided by the FCRA. § 760.11(1), (4); Woodham, 829 So.2d at 894

Caraballo v. South Stevedoring, Inc.

932 F. Supp. 1462, 1996 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 10467, 1996 WL 413595

District Court, S.D. Florida | Filed: Jul 3, 1996 | Docket: 944510

Cited 13 times | Published

required some sort of workplace accommodation. Section 760.11 requires that a putative plaintiff file a charge

Moses v. K-Mart Corp.

905 F. Supp. 1054, 35 Fed. R. Serv. 3d 1530, 1995 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 16842, 1995 WL 669402

District Court, S.D. Florida | Filed: Oct 30, 1995 | Docket: 1336326

Cited 13 times | Published

tangible or intangible injuries." Fla.Stat.Ann. § 760.11(5). The wording of the Court's instruction, although

Flyer Printing Company, Inc. v. Hill

805 So. 2d 829, 17 I.E.R. Cas. (BNA) 1402, 2001 Fla. App. LEXIS 9761, 86 Fair Empl. Prac. Cas. (BNA) 513, 2001 WL 804065

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Jul 18, 2001 | Docket: 1669467

Cited 12 times | Published

and the Florida Civil Rights Act of 1992, section 760.11, Florida Statutes (1999). Flyer Printing moved

Sanders v. Mayor's Jewelers, Inc.

942 F. Supp. 571, 1996 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 14223, 70 Empl. Prac. Dec. (CCH) 44,654, 76 Fair Empl. Prac. Cas. (BNA) 355, 1996 WL 550129

District Court, S.D. Florida | Filed: Aug 2, 1996 | Docket: 1247485

Cited 12 times | Published

specific situations is underscored by Fla.Stat. § 760.11: "Any person aggrieved by a violation of ss. 760

Jones v. Bank of America

985 F. Supp. 2d 1320, 2013 WL 6085137, 2013 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 164730

District Court, M.D. Florida | Filed: Nov 19, 2013 | Docket: 65995948

Cited 11 times | Published

177688, at *1 (M.D.Fla. Jan. 19, 2007); Fla. Stat. § 760.11. To exhaust administrative remedies under the

Turrie Webb v. Worldwide Flight Services

407 F.3d 1192, 2005 U.S. App. LEXIS 7533, 86 Empl. Prac. Dec. (CCH) 41,923, 95 Fair Empl. Prac. Cas. (BNA) 1148, 18 Fla. L. Weekly Fed. C 479

Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit | Filed: May 2, 2005 | Docket: 398316

Cited 10 times | Published

FCRA’s procedural requirements under Fla. Stat. § 760.11. Subsequently, the district court permitted Webb

McElrath v. Burley

707 So. 2d 836, 1998 WL 78796

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Feb 26, 1998 | Docket: 1676195

Cited 10 times | Published

in which an aggrieved person must prevail under § 760.11(7), Florida Statutes, before being allowed to

Robinson v. Department of Health

89 So. 3d 1079, 2012 WL 2053298, 2012 Fla. App. LEXIS 9183

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Jun 8, 2012 | Docket: 60308525

Cited 9 times | Published

suit asserting a statutory cause of action. See § 760.11(1), Fla. Stat. (2009). Unless the complaint is

Ross v. Jim Adams Ford, Inc.

871 So. 2d 312, 2004 WL 1057655

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: May 7, 2004 | Docket: 1300677

Cited 9 times | Published

complaint as a prerequisite to this action, see § 760.11, Fla. Stat. (1993); Sweeney v. Fla. Power & Light

Sweeney v. FLORIDA POWER AND LIGHT COMPANY INC.

725 So. 2d 380, 1998 Fla. App. LEXIS 13461, 78 Fair Empl. Prac. Cas. (BNA) 610, 1998 WL 764690

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Oct 21, 1998 | Docket: 1293932

Cited 9 times | Published

expiration of the 180 day period provided by section 760.11(3), (8), Florida Statutes (1995)[1] for the

Hill v. Xerox Corp.

998 F. Supp. 1378, 1998 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 10997, 1998 WL 128431

District Court, N.D. Florida | Filed: Feb 2, 1998 | Docket: 1671548

Cited 9 times | Published

however, provides for compensatory damages. See Fla.Stat. 760.11(5). [8] Although, as set forth below, I accept

Greene v. Seminole Elec. Co-Op., Inc.

701 So. 2d 646, 1997 WL 710317

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Nov 14, 1997 | Docket: 1736913

Cited 9 times | Published

out of acts occurring before 16 June 1993. Section 760.11(1), which is a statute of limitations, see

Milano v. Moldmaster, Inc.

703 So. 2d 1093, 1997 WL 656346

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Oct 22, 1997 | Docket: 1704009

Cited 9 times | Published

interpretation that the statute of limitations had run. Section 760.11(3), Florida Statutes, 1995, provides in part:

Sunbeam Television Corp. v. Mitzel

83 So. 3d 865, 2012 Fla. App. LEXIS 485, 114 Fair Empl. Prac. Cas. (BNA) 354, 2012 WL 126784

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Jan 18, 2012 | Docket: 60306518

Cited 8 times | Published

of the alleged discrimination as required by section 760.11(1) of the Florida Statutes; and second, that

Cisko v. Phoenix Medical Products, Inc.

797 So. 2d 11, 2001 Fla. App. LEXIS 10625, 2001 WL 844675

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Jul 27, 2001 | Docket: 1714827

Cited 8 times | Published

follow the specific administrative procedures of section 760.11, Florida Statutes (1997). That statute requires

Green v. Burger King Corp.

728 So. 2d 369, 9 Am. Disabilities Cas. (BNA) 161, 1999 Fla. App. LEXIS 3425, 1999 WL 157251

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Mar 24, 1999 | Docket: 1673871

Cited 8 times | Published

attorney and was unverified in contravention of section 760.11(1), Florida Statutes (1995). The EEOC then

Shedrick v. District Board of Trustees of Miami-Dade College

941 F. Supp. 2d 1348, 2013 WL 1748789, 2013 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 57947

District Court, S.D. Florida | Filed: Apr 23, 2013 | Docket: 65990856

Cited 7 times | Published

not be liable for punitive damages.” Fla. Stat. § 760.11; see Klonis v. Fla. Dep’t of Revenue, 766 So.2d

Thompson v. Orange Lake Country Club, Inc.

224 F. Supp. 2d 1368, 2002 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 17858, 2002 WL 31104011

District Court, M.D. Florida | Filed: Jul 23, 2002 | Docket: 2357696

Cited 7 times | Published

Alternative, 908 F.Supp. 908, 910 (M.D.Fla.1995); Section 760.11(a) of the FCRA requires that a plaintiff file

Hipp v. Liberty National Life Insurance

65 F. Supp. 2d 1314, 1999 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 13457, 1999 WL 675434

District Court, M.D. Florida | Filed: Aug 15, 1999 | Docket: 2297697

Cited 7 times | Published

and, with respect to the Florida Plaintiffs, Section 760.11(5), Florida Statutes. However, in the time

Wineberger v. RaceTrac Petroleum, Inc.

672 F. App'x 914

Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit | Filed: Nov 30, 2016 | Docket: 65964051

Cited 6 times | Published

permits the award of attorney’s fees. See Fla. Stat. § 760.11(5). The parties agree that a district court “must

Short v. Immokalee Water & Sewer District

165 F. Supp. 3d 1129, 2016 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 23163, 2016 WL 749007

District Court, M.D. Florida | Filed: Feb 25, 2016 | Docket: 64307176

Cited 6 times | Published

remedies is 365 days under the FCRA, Fla. Stat. § 760.11(1), the analysis is otherwise the same as under

Collins v. Miami-Dade County

361 F. Supp. 2d 1362, 2005 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 4661, 2005 WL 668825

District Court, S.D. Florida | Filed: Feb 7, 2005 | Docket: 2367585

Cited 6 times | Published

See Woodham, 829 So.2d at 894 (citing FLA. STAT. § 760.11(1) (1999)). Ms. Collins stated at her deposition

Woodham v. BLUE CROSS & BLUE SHIELD OF FLA. INC.

793 So. 2d 41, 2001 WL 575105

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Sep 12, 2001 | Docket: 1266265

Cited 6 times | Published

pursue the administrative remedies outlined in section 760.11(7), Florida Statute (1999), before bringing

Stevens v. Steak N Shake, Inc.

35 F. Supp. 2d 882, 1998 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 22139, 1998 WL 953737

District Court, M.D. Florida | Filed: Sep 3, 1998 | Docket: 2359070

Cited 6 times | Published

this section has a right of action pursuant to § 760.11. Fla.Stat. § 509.092 (emphasis supplied). The

Pettis v. Brown Group Retail, Inc.

896 F. Supp. 1163, 1995 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 11518, 1995 WL 465831

District Court, N.D. Florida | Filed: Jul 17, 1995 | Docket: 1164603

Cited 6 times | Published

(1985). As to the Florida Civil Rights Act, Section 760.11(5) provides for an award of "compensatory damages

Fusco v. Victoria's Secret Stores, LLC

806 F. Supp. 2d 1240, 2011 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 98194, 2011 WL 3792412

District Court, M.D. Florida | Filed: Aug 19, 2011 | Docket: 1994346

Cited 5 times | Published

fees are awarded as part of the costs. Fla. Stat. § 760.11(5). As stated above, costs cannot be considered

Robinson v. ALUTIQ-MELE, LLC

643 F. Supp. 2d 1342, 2009 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 114467, 2009 WL 2424653

District Court, S.D. Florida | Filed: Apr 6, 2009 | Docket: 2474987

Cited 5 times | Published

Statute section 760.11(5) and Florida Statute section 57.105.[12] 1. Florida Statute section 760.11(5) The

Donovan v. Broward County Bd. of Com'rs

974 So. 2d 458, 2008 WL 183397

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Jan 23, 2008 | Docket: 1717244

Cited 5 times | Published

gov/ policy/docs/retal.html# Il part D. [2] See § 760.11(1), Fla. Stat. ("Any person aggrieved by a violation

Garrett v. Department of Corrections

589 F. Supp. 2d 1289, 2007 WL 5844121

District Court, M.D. Florida | Filed: Jun 20, 2007 | Docket: 1482606

Cited 5 times | Published

FCRA claims. See 42 U.S.C. § 2000e-5; Fla. Stat. § 760.11. It is the law in this Circuit that a plaintiff

Gallagher v. Manatee County

927 So. 2d 914, 2006 WL 229044

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Feb 1, 2006 | Docket: 1765505

Cited 5 times | Published

"[t]he total amount of recovery" provided for in section 760.11(5), Florida Statutes (2002), which by reference

Belletete v. Halford

886 So. 2d 308, 2004 WL 2534244

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Nov 10, 2004 | Docket: 1721204

Cited 5 times | Published

their counterpart in the FCRA, section 760.11. In the case of section 760.11 the "may file a complaint" language

Wein v. American Huts, Inc.

313 F. Supp. 2d 1356, 15 Am. Disabilities Cas. (BNA) 1053, 2004 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 6505, 2004 WL 825274

District Court, S.D. Florida | Filed: Apr 12, 2004 | Docket: 42327

Cited 5 times | Published

¶¶ 19-31. Finally, pursuant to Florida Statute § 760.11(5), Plaintiffs "demand compensatory damages, damages

Jones v. Lakeland Regional Medical Center

805 So. 2d 940, 2001 Fla. App. LEXIS 15796, 87 Fair Empl. Prac. Cas. (BNA) 337, 2001 WL 1386595

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Nov 9, 2001 | Docket: 1669503

Cited 5 times | Published

Human Relations (FCHR) pursuant to the Act. See § 760.11(7), Fla. Stat. (1997) (stating that when a "no

Joshua v. City of Gainesville

734 So. 2d 1068, 1999 Fla. App. LEXIS 4622, 1999 WL 71523

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Feb 17, 1999 | Docket: 1731047

Cited 5 times | Published

of great public importance.[2] Pursuant to section 760.11(1), Florida Statutes (1995), an aggrieved party

Robinson v. Power Pizza, Inc.

993 F. Supp. 1458, 1998 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 2661, 1998 WL 81884

District Court, M.D. Florida | Filed: Feb 11, 1998 | Docket: 2172838

Cited 5 times | Published

of the Answer. See Fla. Stat. § 760.11(1); see also Fla. Stat. § 760.11(3) ("Within 180 days of the filing

Sparks v. Jay's A.C. & Refrigeration, Inc.

971 F. Supp. 1433, 1997 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 16558, 1997 WL 404019

District Court, M.D. Florida | Filed: Jul 15, 1997 | Docket: 1486151

Cited 5 times | Published

the Florida Civil Rights Act. Florida Statute § 760.11(5) specifically provides for punitive damages

ANDELA v. University of Miami

692 F. Supp. 2d 1356, 2010 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 20432, 2010 WL 768947

District Court, S.D. Florida | Filed: Mar 8, 2010 | Docket: 2246207

Cited 4 times | Published

violation of the Florida Civil Rights Act of 1992." § 760.11(3), Fla. Stat. If the FCHR determines no reasonable

University of Central Florida Board of Trustees v. Turkiewicz

21 So. 3d 141, 29 I.E.R. Cas. (BNA) 1839, 2009 Fla. App. LEXIS 16555, 2009 WL 3672073

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Nov 6, 2009 | Docket: 1230234

Cited 4 times | Published

(Emphasis added). The Maggio court described section 760.11(1) as containing a set of "pre-suit administrative

Yoder Bros., Inc. v. Weygant

973 So. 2d 625, 2008 Fla. App. LEXIS 785, 2008 WL 199897

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Jan 25, 2008 | Docket: 1292699

Cited 4 times | Published

proposal for settlement was inconsistent with section 760.11(5), Florida Statutes (2004), and therefore

Zamora v. ATLANTIC UNIV. BD. OF TRUSTEES

969 So. 2d 1108, 2007 Fla. App. LEXIS 17767, 101 Fair Empl. Prac. Cas. (BNA) 1860, 2007 WL 3274376

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Nov 7, 2007 | Docket: 1725963

Cited 4 times | Published

limit set forth in section 768.28(5), citing section 760.11(5) and Gallagher v. Manatee County, 927 So

McCoy v. Pinellas County

920 So. 2d 1260, 2006 Fla. App. LEXIS 2734, 2006 WL 469907

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Mar 1, 2006 | Docket: 1441030

Cited 4 times | Published

attorneys' fees to Pinellas County pursuant to section 760.11(5), Florida Statutes (2003). The fees were

O'Donnell's Corp. v. Ambroise

858 So. 2d 1138, 2003 Fla. App. LEXIS 16945, 2003 WL 22513826

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Nov 7, 2003 | Docket: 460739

Cited 4 times | Published

hearing, his claim would be dismissed pursuant to section 760.11, Florida Statutes (1992). Thirty-six days later

Armstrong v. Charlotte County Board of County Commissioners

273 F. Supp. 2d 1312, 2003 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 12960

District Court, M.D. Florida | Filed: Apr 10, 2003 | Docket: 2210171

Cited 4 times | Published

to 42 U.S.C. § 2000e-5(g) and Fla. Stat. Ann. § 760.11, and for an award of prejudgment interest. Plaintiff's

White v. City of Pompano Beach

813 So. 2d 1003, 2002 WL 429241

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Mar 20, 2002 | Docket: 1402939

Cited 4 times | Published

under the one-year statute of limitations in section 760.11(5), Florida Statutes (1999). We agree and reverse

Dawkins v. Bellsouth Telecommunications, Inc.

53 F. Supp. 2d 1356, 9 Am. Disabilities Cas. (BNA) 975, 1999 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 10116, 1999 WL 454656

District Court, M.D. Florida | Filed: Jun 8, 1999 | Docket: 2133119

Cited 4 times | Published

this argument in part on the language of Fla.Code § 760.11(1), which provides that the date that the complaint

Paldano v. Althin Medical, Inc.

974 F. Supp. 1441, 1996 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 21066, 84 Fair Empl. Prac. Cas. (BNA) 399, 1996 WL 913071

District Court, S.D. Florida | Filed: Dec 12, 1996 | Docket: 1617032

Cited 4 times | Published

("FCHR") within 365 days of the alleged violation. § 760.11(1) Fla.Stat. (1995); Trumbull v. Health Care and

Carlson v. WPLG/TV-10, POST-NEWSWEEK STATIONS

956 F. Supp. 994, 1996 WL 767540

District Court, S.D. Florida | Filed: Aug 31, 1996 | Docket: 1464474

Cited 4 times | Published

intangible and/or emotional distress damages under F.S. § 760.11 and prejudgment interest on any back pay awarded

Florida Leisure v. Florida Com'n on Hr

639 So. 2d 1028, 1994 WL 321675

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Jul 8, 1994 | Docket: 1712616

Cited 4 times | Published

, at 897. At least it should be noted that section 760.11(13), Florida Statutes (1993), which deals with

Buade v. Terra Group

259 So. 3d 219

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Nov 7, 2018 | Docket: 8146143

Cited 3 times | Published

requirement regarding retaliation claims. See § 760.11, Fla. Stat. (2011); Sheridan v. State, Dep’t of

Fulford. v. Miami-Dade County

219 F. Supp. 3d 1248, 2016 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 156675, 2016 WL 7011394

District Court, S.D. Florida | Filed: Nov 10, 2016 | Docket: 64311317

Cited 3 times | Published

*2 (N.D. Fla. Aug. 30, 2016) (citing Fla. Stat. § 760.11). Fulford alleges in his Amended Complaint that

Liu v. University of Miami

138 F. Supp. 3d 1360, 2015 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 142511, 2015 WL 5997069

District Court, S.D. Florida | Filed: Aug 28, 2015 | Docket: 64304794

Cited 3 times | Published

165, 172 (Fla. 4th DCA 2012) (quoting Fla. Stat. § 760.11(1)). Claims- that are not timely filed are time-barred

Gerber v. Vincent's Men's Hairstyling, Inc.

57 So. 3d 935, 2011 Fla. App. LEXIS 4354, 2011 WL 1135455

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Mar 30, 2011 | Docket: 60299207

Cited 3 times | Published

2000e-5(f)(l), and the Florida Civil Rights Act (FCRA), section 760.11, Florida Statutes (2009). The trial court agreed

Carter v. HEALTH MANAGEMENT ASSOCIATES

989 So. 2d 1258, 2008 WL 4180337

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Sep 12, 2008 | Docket: 1665451

Cited 3 times | Published

she had first filed a claim before the FCHR. See § 760.11; Haines City HMA, Inc., 948 So.2d 904 (affirming

Leola Bradshaw v. School Board of Broward Co.

486 F.3d 1205, 2007 U.S. App. LEXIS 11354, 89 Empl. Prac. Dec. (CCH) 42,839, 100 Fair Empl. Prac. Cas. (BNA) 1083, 2007 WL 1412570

Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit | Filed: May 15, 2007 | Docket: 398908

Cited 3 times | Published

parties agree includes the School Board. Fla. Stat. § 760.11(5). Recovery against the state “shall not exceed

Dixon v. Sprint-Florida, Inc.

787 So. 2d 968, 2001 Fla. App. LEXIS 8999, 2001 WL 725980

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Jun 29, 2001 | Docket: 1495751

Cited 3 times | Published

thus within the mandatory 365 day time period. § 760.11(1), Fla. Stat. (1997).[6] When FCHR did not issue

Jones v. Brummer

766 So. 2d 1107, 2000 WL 1153990

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Aug 16, 2000 | Docket: 1329624

Cited 3 times | Published

practices); § 760.11, Fla. Stat. (administrative and civil remedies). Jones also relies on section 760.11(15)

Greene v. Loewenstein, Inc.

99 F. Supp. 2d 1373, 2000 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 10353, 2000 WL 775305

District Court, S.D. Florida | Filed: Apr 27, 2000 | Docket: 2134728

Cited 3 times | Published

Greene's position transfer. The FCRA, Fla. Stat. § 760.11(1), however, permits a plaintiff to file a discrimination

Gillis v. Sports Authority, Inc.

123 F. Supp. 2d 611, 2000 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 15790, 2000 WL 1763840

District Court, S.D. Florida | Filed: Apr 24, 2000 | Docket: 2346629

Cited 3 times | Published

discrimination with the FCHR. See Fla. Stat. Ann. § 760.11.(1997); Weaver v. Florida Power & Light, No. 95-8519-CIV-RYSKAMP

Nichols v. Wal-Mart Stores, Inc.

958 F. Supp. 583, 1997 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 22135, 1997 WL 164032

District Court, M.D. Florida | Filed: Mar 21, 1997 | Docket: 1495176

Cited 3 times | Published

after this time period was appropriate. Fla. Stat. § 760.11(8) (1995). I. A motion to dismiss pursuant to

City of Delray Beach v. DeSisto

197 So. 3d 1206, 2016 Fla. App. LEXIS 11109, 2016 WL 3911373

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Jul 20, 2016 | Docket: 60256175

Cited 2 times | Published

the limitations set forth iri section 768.28(5). § 760.11(5), Fla. Stat. (2012). Section 768.28(5) grants

Byrd v. BT FOODS, INC.

26 So. 3d 600, 22 Am. Disabilities Cas. (BNA) 1445, 2009 Fla. App. LEXIS 18431, 2009 WL 4282945

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Dec 2, 2009 | Docket: 239434

Cited 2 times | Published

to maintain the private right of action,” See § 760.11(5), Fla. Stat. (2008). I believe that this provision

Moore v. Hillsborough County Board of County Commissioners

544 F. Supp. 2d 1291, 2008 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 1368

District Court, M.D. Florida | Filed: Jan 8, 2008 | Docket: 1275380

Cited 2 times | Published

within 365 days of the alleged unlawful act, Fla. Stat. 760.11(1). Defendant argues that Plaintiff has not

SPEEDWAY SUPERAMERICA, LLC v. Dupont

955 So. 2d 533, 32 Fla. L. Weekly Supp. 124, 2007 Fla. LEXIS 572, 2007 WL 1012884

Supreme Court of Florida | Filed: Apr 5, 2007 | Docket: 1185688

Cited 2 times | Published

EMPLOYEE, APPLY TO PUNITIVE DAMAGE AWARDS UNDER SECTION 760.11(5), FLORIDA STATUTES? Id. at 91. After further

DCFS v. Garcia

911 So. 2d 171, 2005 WL 2030310

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Aug 24, 2005 | Docket: 1500961

Cited 2 times | Published

administratively, rather than in a civil action. § 760.11(5)(6), Fla. Stat. (2004); see Maggio v. Fla. Dep't

Phillips v. FLA. COM'N ON HUMAN RELATIONS

846 So. 2d 1221, 2003 WL 21295011

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Jun 6, 2003 | Docket: 245586

Cited 2 times | Published

moved for appellate attorney's fees pursuant to section 760.11(13), Florida Statutes. There is no issue on

Segura v. Hunter Douglas Fabrication Co.

184 F. Supp. 2d 1227, 12 Am. Disabilities Cas. (BNA) 1396, 2002 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 1912, 2002 WL 185543

District Court, M.D. Florida | Filed: Feb 4, 2002 | Docket: 2337507

Cited 2 times | Published

a charge of discrimination with the FCHR. See § 760.11(1) Fla. Stat. (2001). According to the work sharing

Wells Fargo Guard Services Inc. of Florida v. Lehman

799 So. 2d 252, 2001 Fla. App. LEXIS 11128, 2001 WL 883652

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Aug 8, 2001 | Docket: 1681796

Cited 2 times | Published

dismissal, holding that the 180 days required by section 760.11, Florida Statutes (1995), began to run when

Andreu v. HP Inc.

272 F. Supp. 3d 1329

District Court, S.D. Florida | Filed: Sep 26, 2017 | Docket: 64315650

Cited 1 times | Published

Civil Rights Act, had not been met. See Fla. Stat. § 760.11(1). The Eleventh Circuit has already rejected

Stephen v. H. Lee Moffitt Cancer Center & Research Institute Lifetime Cancer Screening Center, Inc.

259 F. Supp. 3d 1323

District Court, M.D. Florida | Filed: May 3, 2017 | Docket: 64314629

Cited 1 times | Published

Fla. Stat. § 760.11. He must file a charge, see 42 U.S.C. § 2000e-5(e), Fla. Stat. § 760.11(1), which

Beltway Capital, LLC v. Nigel Lucombe

211 So. 3d 328, 2017 WL 651112, 2017 Fla. App. LEXIS 2235

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Feb 17, 2017 | Docket: 4586866

Cited 1 times | Published

challenge to the verification of a complaint under section 760.11(1), Florida Statutes (2001), could be waived

Housing Opportunities Project for Excellence, Inc. v. Spv Realty, Lc

212 So. 3d 419, 2016 Fla. App. LEXIS 18680

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Dec 21, 2016 | Docket: 4555832

Cited 1 times | Published

their Florida Civil Rights Act counterpart, section 760.11); see also Hankey v. Yarian, 755 So.2d 93,

Wolf v. MWH Constructors, Inc.

34 F. Supp. 3d 1213, 2014 WL 3707658, 2014 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 101754

District Court, M.D. Florida | Filed: Jul 25, 2014 | Docket: 64296284

Cited 1 times | Published

the purported discriminatory act. See Fla. Stat. § 760.11(1). Either way, a plaintiff cannot recover for

Maynard v. Taco Bell of America, Inc.

117 So. 3d 1159, 2013 WL 2361004, 2013 Fla. App. LEXIS 8579

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: May 31, 2013 | Docket: 60232562

Cited 1 times | Published

nor his passenger was arrested. Pursuant to section 760.11, Florida Statutes (2005), Maynard had 365 days

City of West Palm Beach v. McCray

91 So. 3d 165, 2012 Fla. App. LEXIS 8266, 2012 WL 1859502

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: May 23, 2012 | Docket: 60309822

Cited 1 times | Published

2d 106 (2002) (hereinafter “National R.R.”). Section 760.11 of the Florida Civil Rights Act (“FCRA”) provides

Saridakis v. South Broward Hospital District

681 F. Supp. 2d 1338, 2009 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 120246, 108 Fair Empl. Prac. Cas. (BNA) 646, 2009 WL 5214969

District Court, S.D. Florida | Filed: Dec 28, 2009 | Docket: 2391906

Cited 1 times | Published

Florida Civil Rights Act (the "FCRA"), Fla. Stat. § 760.11(5); Count IV, retaliation in violation of the

Ponce v. Fontainebleau Resorts, LLC

653 F. Supp. 2d 1297, 2009 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 89473, 2009 WL 2948543

District Court, S.D. Florida | Filed: Jul 13, 2009 | Docket: 2289745

Cited 1 times | Published

federal diversity jurisdiction." Id. at 1095-96. Section 760.11(5) of the Florida Statutes, concerning the

BD. OF TRUSTEES OF STATE UNIV. v. Esposito

991 So. 2d 924, 2008 WL 3540213

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Aug 15, 2008 | Docket: 1398302

Cited 1 times | Published

limitation on the "total amount of recovery" in section 760.11(5), Florida Statutes (2005), which by reference

Haines City HMA, Inc. v. Carter

948 So. 2d 904, 2007 WL 428897

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Feb 9, 2007 | Docket: 1773701

Cited 1 times | Published

prevailing party attorney's fees, as provided in section 760.11(5), which it enhanced by a multiplier of 1

Vandesande v. Miami-Dade County

431 F. Supp. 2d 1245, 2006 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 29855, 2006 WL 1284662

District Court, S.D. Florida | Filed: Apr 7, 2006 | Docket: 2205592

Cited 1 times | Published

judgment should be GRANTED as to Count II. Section 760.11(7) of the Florida Civil Rights Act ("FCRA")

Jackson v. WORLDWIDE FLIGHT SERVICES, INC.

960 So. 2d 3, 2005 Fla. App. LEXIS 4353, 2005 WL 713784

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Mar 30, 2005 | Docket: 1726272

Cited 1 times | Published

required 180-day investigative period set forth in section 760.11, Florida Statutes (2000). Following the court

Santini v. Cleveland Clinic Florida

843 So. 2d 1029, 2003 Fla. App. LEXIS 6675, 2003 WL 21012701

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: May 7, 2003 | Docket: 64822558

Cited 1 times | Published

statutory language instructs otherwise. Under section 760.11(1), Florida Statutes, “Amy person aggrieved

Palisano v. City of Clearwater

219 F. Supp. 2d 1249, 2002 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 21043, 2002 WL 2012043

District Court, M.D. Florida | Filed: Aug 14, 2002 | Docket: 2320445

Cited 1 times | Published

administrative remedies pursuant to Fla. Stat. § 760.11, a condition precedent to bringing suit. Plaintiff

Bach v. United Parcel Service, Inc.

808 So. 2d 230, 2001 WL 984715

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Aug 29, 2001 | Docket: 2577929

Cited 1 times | Published

Human Relations ("Commission"). Pursuant to section 760.11(3), Florida Statutes (1999), the Commission

Williams v. Southeast Florida Cable, Inc.

782 So. 2d 988, 2001 WL 388094

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Apr 18, 2001 | Docket: 456465

Cited 1 times | Published

Commission on Human Relations (FCHR) pursuant to section 760.11(1), Florida Statutes (1995). On March 5, 1997

Ellsworth v. Polk County Board of County Commissioners

780 So. 2d 903, 26 Fla. L. Weekly Supp. 95, 2001 Fla. LEXIS 331, 2001 WL 169598

Supreme Court of Florida | Filed: Feb 22, 2001 | Docket: 64804408

Cited 1 times | Published

determination within the 180 day period embodied in section 760.11(8).1 On November 19, 1998, Ellsworth filed

Ellsworth v. POLK COUNTY BD. OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS

751 So. 2d 87, 1999 Fla. App. LEXIS 17265, 1999 WL 1259002

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Dec 29, 1999 | Docket: 2587607

Cited 1 times | Published

DCA) (holding claim to be time barred under section 760.11(5), Florida Statutes (1995), and certifying

Adams v. WELLINGTON REGIONAL MEDICAL

727 So. 2d 1139, 1999 Fla. App. LEXIS 3144, 1999 WL 140759

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Mar 17, 1999 | Docket: 2562394

Cited 1 times | Published

as one of great public importance: DOES THE SECTION 760.11(5), FLORIDA STATUTES (1995), ONE-YEAR STATUTE

Hipp v. Liberty National Life Insurance

39 F. Supp. 2d 1359, 1999 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 3678, 1999 WL 159999

District Court, M.D. Florida | Filed: Mar 11, 1999 | Docket: 2173302

Cited 1 times | Published

should be awarded in full. Florida Statutes Section 760.11(5) caps punitive damages under the Florida

Digiro v. Pall Aeropower Corp.

19 F. Supp. 2d 1304, 1998 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 16200, 1998 WL 730163

District Court, M.D. Florida | Filed: Oct 2, 1998 | Docket: 2394497

Cited 1 times | Published

Plaintiff's Amended Complaint. (Docket No. 24). Section 760.11(1) of the "FCRA" provides that "Any person

Wesley Group Home Ministries v. HALLANDALE

670 So. 2d 1046, 1996 WL 106381

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Mar 13, 1996 | Docket: 1671321

Cited 1 times | Published

federal case law involving a Title VII action." § 760.11(5) Fla.Stat. (1995). Recognizing the importance

Henderson v. Hovnanian Enterprises, Inc.

884 F. Supp. 499, 1995 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 6016, 67 Fair Empl. Prac. Cas. (BNA) 1462, 1995 WL 262888

District Court, S.D. Florida | Filed: Apr 18, 1995 | Docket: 934305

Cited 1 times | Published

Florida Legislature clearly indicated that the § 760.11 provisions for compensatory and punitive damages

Carlton Condominium Association, Inc. v. Dominique Miniaci

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Sep 3, 2025 | Docket: 71259169

Published

and 768.73 do not apply to this section. § 760.11(5), Fla. Stat. (2024). Petitioner argued that

Davis v. Big Bend Hospice, Inc.

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Aug 20, 2025 | Docket: 71154550

Published

because Davis’ cause may still accrue under section 760.11(8), Florida Statutes, we reverse.

Genna Brugal v. City of Naples

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Aug 1, 2025 | Docket: 70989231

Published

Opportunity Commission (“EEOC”) was sufficient under section 760.11, Florida Statutes (2019), to alert the City

Steak N Shake, Inc. v. Wilfred Ramos, Jr.

Supreme Court of Florida | Filed: Jul 10, 2025 | Docket: 70749419

Published

investigate alleged discriminatory practices. § 760.11(3), (11), Fla. Stat. To facilitate the Commission’s

State of Florida, Agency for Persons With Disabilities v. Sally Toal

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Feb 26, 2025 | Docket: 69674137

Published

form of relief, it expressly says so. See, e.g., § 760.11(5), Fla. Stat. (authorizing the award of “damages

Karla Pacheco v. Waldo Acebo, M.D., P.A., Etc.

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Feb 19, 2025 | Docket: 69651959

Published

commission determined that there was reasonable cause.” § 760.11(8)(a), Fla. Stat. 6 The complaint asserts “Acebo

Washington County School Board, Calhoun County School Board v. Davis

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Jan 23, 2025 | Docket: 69569108

Published

retaliatory acts as required per section 760.11(1), Florida Statutes. Section 760.11(1) requires charges alleging

Mooshie v. Florida State Lodge Fraternal Order of Police

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Dec 11, 2024 | Docket: 69455311

Published

one-year statute of limitations contained in section 760.11, Florida Statutes (2023). Because we agree

WILFRED W. RAMOS, JR. v. STEAK N SHAKE, INC.

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Dec 20, 2023 | Docket: 68103410

Published

Ramos filed his opposition, arguing that under section 760.11(1), he could file a complaint with the EEOC

Mary E. Harris v. The Public Health Trust of Miami-Dade County

Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit | Filed: Oct 4, 2023 | Docket: 66760582

Published

Argued: Jan 25, 2023

See 42 U.S.C. § 2000e- 5(e); Fla. Stat. § 760.11(1). In general, events that occur outside the

PAULA GRACE WILLIS v. ACCENTURE, INC.

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Mar 15, 2023 | Docket: 67012407

Published

Florida Commission on Human Relations (FCHR). See § 760.11(3), Fla. Stat. (“Within 180 days of the filing

AISY ALEU, PHARM. D. v. NOVA SOUTHEASTERN UNIVERSITY, INC.

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Feb 15, 2023 | Docket: 66814493

Published

the one-year limitation period provided in section 760.11(5), Florida Statutes (2015) (“A civil action

ANDRE WHITE v. AUTOZONE INVESTMENT CORPORATION, D/B/A AUTOZONE AUTO PARTS

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Sep 7, 2022 | Docket: 64952870

Published

11A-28(10) to the administrative scheme of section 760.11(4), Florida Statutes, which provides that if

ANDRE WHITE v. AUTOZONE INVESTMENT CORPORATION, D/B/A AUTOZONE AUTO PARTS

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Jun 15, 2022 | Docket: 63385759

Published

11A-28(10) to the administrative scheme of section 760.11(4), Florida Statutes, which provides that if

O C FOOD & BEVERAGE, LLC D/B/A RACHEL'S AND WEST PALM BEACH FOOD AND BEVERAGE, LLC D/B/A RACHEL'S ADULT ENTERTAINMENT AND STEAKHOUSE vs ORANGE COUNTY, FLORIDA, ANITA YANES AND BRITTNEY SMITH

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: May 6, 2022 | Docket: 68035467

Published

FILING A LAWSUIT SET FORTH IN SECTION 760.11, FLORIDA STATUTES, APPLICABLE TO

Samantha Ring v. Boca Ciega Yacht Club Inc.

Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit | Filed: Jul 12, 2021 | Docket: 60050677

Published

the Florida Civil Rights Act. See Fla. Stat. § 760.11(5). After both parties moved for summary

VITAL PHARMACEUTICALS, INC. v. CHERYL OHEL

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Oct 14, 2020 | Docket: 18534799

Published

aggrieved person shall not exceed $100,000. § 760.11(5), Fla. Stat. (2019) (emphasis supplied).

Christine D'Onofrio v. Costco Wholesale Corporation

Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit | Filed: Jul 6, 2020 | Docket: 17324057

Published

Florida Civil Rights Act of 1992 (FCRA), § 760.01 - § 760.11. The dispute arose after Costco Wholesale Corporation

Capital Health Plan v. Timothy Moore

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Oct 23, 2019 | Docket: 16368644

Published

White, 97 So. 3d 907, 909 (Fla. 1st DCA 2012). Section 760.11(5), Florida Statutes, allows prevailing parties

Bentley v. Miami Air Int'l, Inc.

377 F. Supp. 3d 1337

District Court, S.D. Florida | Filed: Feb 27, 2019 | Docket: 64324188

Published

claim under the FCRA with the EEOC. See Fla. Stat. § 760.11 ("[A] complaint under this section may be filed

In Re: Standard Jury Instructions in Civil Cases—report No. 16-01

214 So. 3d 552

Supreme Court of Florida | Filed: Apr 6, 2017 | Docket: 4669815

Published

discriminatory practice, including back pay.” F.S. 760.11(5). Under Florida law, back pay is a legal

Hochbaum Ex Rel. Hochbaum v. Palm Garden of Winter Haven, LLC

201 So. 3d 218, 2016 Fla. App. LEXIS 14827

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Oct 5, 2016 | Docket: 4469184

Published

2000e-5(k), and the Florida Civil Rights Act, § 760.11(5), Fla. Stat. (2000)). This court held that the

Avila v. Childers

212 F. Supp. 3d 1182, 2016 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 143271, 2016 WL 5868100

District Court, N.D. Florida | Filed: Sep 30, 2016 | Docket: 64310667

Published

alleged unlawful employment practice. Fla. Stat. § 760.11 (2015); see also Ganpath v. Advance Stores Co

Kim Cimino, Personal representative of the Estate of Michael Cimino, and Kim Cimino ex rel. Kim and Michael Cimino's Son v. American Airlines, Inc.

183 So. 3d 1242, 2016 Fla. App. LEXIS 720, 2016 WL 231511

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Jan 20, 2016 | Docket: 3029489

Published

within 365 days of .the alleged violation .,” § 760.11(1). An “ ‘[a]g-grieved person’ means any person

Williams v. Department of Corrections

156 So. 3d 563, 2015 Fla. App. LEXIS 809, 2015 WL 276583

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Jan 23, 2015 | Docket: 60245815

Published

first timely exhaust his administrative remedies. § 760.11, Fla. Stat (2011). For example, an employee must

Marchman v. St. Anthony's Hospital, Inc.

152 So. 3d 830, 2014 Fla. App. LEXIS 20188, 2014 WL 7009720

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Dec 12, 2014 | Docket: 2614426

Published

829 So.2d 891, 895 (Fla.2002); cf. § 760.11 (“It is the intent of the Legislature that this

Fuller v. Edward B. Stimpson Co.

971 F. Supp. 2d 1146, 2013 WL 4710863, 2013 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 124545

District Court, S.D. Florida | Filed: Aug 30, 2013 | Docket: 65994279

Published

discriminatory act to be actionable. Fla. Stat. § 760.11(1). Even if Fuller’s claims were not time barred

Cataldo v. Daytona State College

110 So. 3d 990, 2013 WL 1687867, 2013 Fla. App. LEXIS 6463

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Apr 19, 2013 | Docket: 60230582

Published

within 180 days after Cataldo filed his claims. See § 760.11(8), Fla. Stat. (2011) (“In the event that the

McGuire v. Peabody Hotel Group

99 So. 3d 984, 2012 WL 4748147, 2012 Fla. App. LEXIS 17010

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Oct 5, 2012 | Docket: 60313326

Published

familial status, or religion. (Emphasis added.) Section 760.11(1), Florida Statutes (2010), authorizes any

Rodriguez v. City of Clermont

681 F. Supp. 2d 1313, 2009 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 121362, 2009 WL 5218014

District Court, M.D. Florida | Filed: Dec 31, 2009 | Docket: 2391852

Published

the Florida Civil Rights Act of 1992, Fla. Stat. § 760.11 ("FCRA"). The case is presently before the Court

LABATI v. University of Miami

16 So. 3d 886, 2009 Fla. App. LEXIS 9982, 2009 WL 2168722

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Jul 22, 2009 | Docket: 1641029

Published

Fla. Stat. (2008) (Florida's Civil Rights Act); § 760.11(5), Fla. Stat (2008) (authorizing an award of

Ago

Florida Attorney General Reports | Filed: Oct 29, 2008 | Docket: 3256588

Published

action for the remedies and damages described in section 760.11(5), Florida Statutes, and may be filed by the

Manzini & Associates, Pa v. Bso

976 So. 2d 688, 2008 WL 724135

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Mar 19, 2008 | Docket: 1680193

Published

to protect his fee claims against BSO under section 760.11, Florida Statutes. The second attorney testified

Watson v. Brevard County Clerk of the Circuit Court

937 So. 2d 1264, 2006 Fla. App. LEXIS 16406, 2006 WL 2785321

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Sep 29, 2006 | Docket: 64846903

Published

PLEUS, C.J., and GRIFFIN, J., concur. . See section 760.11(7), Florida Statutes (2005). . We note that

Freeman v. Walgreen Co.

407 F. Supp. 2d 1317, 2005 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 38879, 2005 WL 3591986

District Court, S.D. Florida | Filed: Dec 12, 2005 | Docket: 2257496

Published

the EEOC before he can sue in court. See Fla. Stat. 760.11(1). The FCHR must investigate and determine

Gore v. Community Blood Centers of South Florida, Inc.

890 So. 2d 520, 2005 Fla. App. LEXIS 28, 2005 WL 17836

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Jan 5, 2005 | Docket: 64835307

Published

election of remedies pursuant to Florida Statutes section 760.11(4). The trial court agreed and granted Community

Martinez v. Abraham Chevrolet-Tampa, Inc.

891 So. 2d 579, 2004 Fla. App. LEXIS 18813, 2004 WL 3025053

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Dec 10, 2004 | Docket: 64835468

Published

the person file an administrative complaint. See § 760.11, Fla. Stat. (2001). The Florida Commission on

Martinez v. Abraham Chevrolet-Tampa, Inc.

891 So. 2d 579, 2004 Fla. App. LEXIS 18813, 2004 WL 3025053

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Dec 10, 2004 | Docket: 64835468

Published

the person file an administrative complaint. See § 760.11, Fla. Stat. (2001). The Florida Commission on

McGhee v. Sterling Casino Lines, L.P.

857 So. 2d 361, 2003 Fla. App. LEXIS 16047, 2003 WL 22414967

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Oct 24, 2003 | Docket: 64825903

Published

appellee’s motions to be meritorious. Under section 760.11(5), Florida Statutes, reasonable attorney’s

McGhee v. Sterling Casino Lines, LP

833 So. 2d 271, 2002 Fla. App. LEXIS 19253, 2002 WL 31875025

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Dec 27, 2002 | Docket: 1258796

Published

accordance with the time periods contained in section 760.11, Florida Statutes (1999). In accordance with

Hagan v. Seacrest Services, Inc.

819 So. 2d 174, 2002 Fla. App. LEXIS 6191, 2002 WL 893302

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: May 8, 2002 | Docket: 64815922

Published

construed as having been raised by the charge. Section 760.11(7), Florida Statutes (1999), requires complainants

Lee v. JONES LANG LASALLE AMERICAS, INC.

203 F. Supp. 2d 1303, 13 Am. Disabilities Cas. (BNA) 959, 2002 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 9305, 2002 WL 1059551

District Court, N.D. Florida | Filed: Apr 24, 2002 | Docket: 2374983

Published

relief offered by the commission, but not both. § 760.11(7), Fla. Stat. (emphasis added). As the statute

Media General Convergence, Inc. v. Chief Judge of the Thirteenth Judicial Circuit

794 So. 2d 631, 2001 Fla. App. LEXIS 7344, 2001 WL 557896

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: May 25, 2001 | Docket: 64808431

Published

and requests that records remain confidential); § 760.11(12), Fla. Stat. (1999) (making complaints filed

Scelta v. Delicatessen Support Services, Inc.

146 F. Supp. 2d 1255

District Court, M.D. Florida | Filed: May 25, 2001 | Docket: 2203962

Published

costs pursuant to 42 U.S.C.2000e-5(k), Fla. Stat. § 760.11(5), and 28 U.S.C.1927 (Doc. 154). They seek attorneys'

Kocher v. Poe & Brown, Inc.

123 F. Supp. 2d 1337, 2000 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 17989, 2000 WL 1796416

District Court, M.D. Florida | Filed: Oct 18, 2000 | Docket: 2346725

Published

Human Rights ("FCHR")in accordance with Fla.Stat. § 760.11 is granted. Plaintiff neither separately filed

Seale v. EMSA Correctional Care, Inc.

767 So. 2d 1188, 25 Fla. L. Weekly Supp. 689, 2000 Fla. LEXIS 1831, 2000 WL 1288895

Supreme Court of Florida | Filed: Sep 14, 2000 | Docket: 64800607

Published

determination within the 180-day period embodied in section 760.11(8).1 On March 13, 1998, Seale filed a single-count

Benigno Munoz v. Oceanside Resorts, Inc.

223 F.3d 1340, 2000 U.S. App. LEXIS 21523, 78 Empl. Prac. Dec. (CCH) 40,164, 88 Fair Empl. Prac. Cas. (BNA) 628

Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit | Filed: Aug 25, 2000 | Docket: 659105

Published

see Fla. Stat. ch. 760.11(5) (1999) (“section 760.11(5)”). The Resort asserts, however, that this

Benigno Munoz v. Oceanside Resorts, Inc.

223 F.3d 1340

Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit | Filed: Aug 25, 2000 | Docket: 212443

Published

recovery, see Fla. Stat. ch. 760.11(5) (1999) (“section 760.11(5)”). The Resort asserts, however, that this

McDowell v. SCHOOL BD. OF LEON COUNTY

765 So. 2d 804, 2000 Fla. App. LEXIS 10182, 2000 WL 1088608

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Aug 7, 2000 | Docket: 1522916

Published

untimely under the limitations provisions of section 760.11, Florida Statutes (1993), as interpreted by

Choate v. Community Health Centers of Pinellas, Inc.

93 F. Supp. 2d 1318, 2000 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 7184, 2000 WL 554289

District Court, M.D. Florida | Filed: Apr 27, 2000 | Docket: 2171659

Published

interplay of the various time limitations within section 760.11 has not yet been interpreted by the Florida

Ago

Florida Attorney General Reports | Filed: Sep 1, 1999 | Docket: 3258835

Published

Fla. Stat. 6 Section 20.055(5), Fla. Stat. 7 Section 760.11(12), Fla. Stat., provides: "All complaints

Bass v. Board of County Commissioners of Orange County

38 F. Supp. 2d 1001, 1999 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 8810, 1999 WL 159951

District Court, M.D. Florida | Filed: Mar 22, 1999 | Docket: 2160205

Published

and 1983; the Florida Civil Rights Act of 1992, § 760.11 Florida Statutes ("FCRA"); and the Equal Protection

Florida Leisure Acquisition Corp. v. Florida Commission on Human Relations

708 So. 2d 1001, 1998 Fla. App. LEXIS 2954, 23 Fla. L. Weekly Fed. D 823

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Mar 27, 1998 | Docket: 64780030

Published

for that reference erroneously was cited as section 760.11(13), Florida Statutes (1993). The correct statutory

Florida Commission on Human Relations v. Parrish Management, Inc.

682 So. 2d 159, 1996 Fla. App. LEXIS 8644, 69 Empl. Prac. Dec. (CCH) 44,290, 1996 WL 464146

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Aug 15, 1996 | Docket: 64768653

Published

right to pursue a judicial remedy pursuant to section 760.11(4), Florida Statutes (1993).1 DOAH further

Sayers v. Stewart Sleep Center, Inc.

932 F. Supp. 1415, 1996 WL 434449

District Court, M.D. Florida | Filed: Jul 22, 1996 | Docket: 66006120

Published

of the costs.... ” 42 U.S.C. § 2000e-5(k). Section 760.11(5), Florida Statutes, adopts a similar provision

Williams v. Eckerd Family Youth Alternative

903 F. Supp. 1515, 1995 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 15230, 69 Fair Empl. Prac. Cas. (BNA) 301, 1995 WL 608179

District Court, M.D. Florida | Filed: Oct 11, 1995 | Docket: 66000468

Published

remedies. Section 760.11 (Fla.Stat.Supp.1994) addresses this issue. Upon a plain reading of § 760.11, this